Technology users have tended to move away from things that sit in one place, for example cabinet style televisions, toward things that move, for example, cell phones. In fact, laptop computers, portable phones, tablet computers, handheld digital recorders, digital cameras, music players, and personal data devices owe much of their popularity to portability. This portability evolution only emphasizes the unmistakable fact that moving things are highly subject to damage. Examples are plentiful. A dropped cell phone may either no longer work or it may suffer serious visual damage to its case or antenna. A laptop computer placed down too hard on a table may result in damage to its hard drive. A handheld digital recorder can accidently be run into a door frame.
One reason that so many devices can be made portable is the current state of semiconductor technology. High speed and highly configurable microprocessors and microcontrollers are readily available at very reasonable cost and in very small packages. High density, usually programmable, support devices such as solid state memory and “glue” chips, and even more dedicated special purpose devices are also readily available.
Many portable devices are dynamically programmable, that is, they can be programmed not only at the time of manufacturer but later using user-installed application software. User-installed application software, referred to hereinafter as apps, are an extremely flexible and popular methods of installing software onto a device to enable a user to personalize his product to his own needs.
While portable devices can and do break, they do not necessarily have to break as often or as easily as they do. High impact plastic cases, reinforcing padding, smooth surfaces, spring loaded components, and many other design options are readily available. However, those design options are not free and to be most effective they need to be applied intelligently. In addition, while commercial competition often may reward higher reliability it can also severely punish higher costs.
From the foregoing it can be seen that the question of whether to and how to implement design options to improve reliability is not trivial. Implementing protective designs options when not needed or over-applying those options that are needed may result in reduced sales. Not applying protective design options, applying them insufficiently or incorrectly may also lead to reduced sales.
Unfortunately, knowing whether to and how to implement a protective design option is remarkably difficult. The standard approach is to run a series of reliability tests, such as impact tests, drop tests, vibration tests, heat and cold stress tests, moisture tests, and others on a number of test products. Results are compiled and decisions are then made based on those results. This approach is useful, but it is certainly not optional. For example, it is difficult or impossible to obtain real-world use information.
Another approach is to incorporate sensors, such as vibration sensors, accelerometers, gyroscopes, stress sensors and the like into products when running tests. This approach has the decided advantage of providing actual engineering information to product designers. It still has the very serious drawback that such tests are still laboratory tests that may or may not have applicability to real world use.
Furthermore, even if design data is not at issue, in practice some devices are simply better suited for some users in some applications. Some users may simply wish to be warned when they are doing something potentially damaging to a device so that they can take better care in the future. Parents, employers, or other providers of products may wish to find out just how hard users are on a device. Such information could be very useful in actually selecting the products for particular users or applications. Some applications, such as maritime use, may be more potentially damaging than other applications, such as aircraft use. Knowledge of how hard products are handled can be used to select devices or protective packaging such as reinforced plastic cases or padded product carriers.
Unfortunately, in the prior art there was no easy way for designers, device providers, or device users to obtain pertinent real-world information on when potentially damaging motion occurs to a device or how hard a device is being physically used. Therefore, a way of obtaining information about when potentially damaging motion occurs and/or how hard a device is used would be useful. Beneficially, such information could be compiled from each user and from a multitude of users to provide real world information.